A REGULAR MEETING OF THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
AUGUST 24, 2004
The Lake County Board of County Commissioners met in regular session on Tuesday, August 24, 2004, at 9:00 a.m., in the Board of County Commissioner’s Meeting Room, on the second floor of the Lake County Administration Building, Tavares, Florida. Commissioners present at the meeting were: Debbie Stivender, Chairman; Jennifer Hill, Vice Chairman; Welton G. Cadwell; Catherine C. Hanson; and Robert A. Pool. Others present were: Sanford A. “Sandy” Minkoff, County Attorney; William “Bill” Neron, County Manager; Wendy Taylor, Executive Office Manager, Board of County Commissioner’s Office; and Sandra Carter, Deputy Clerk.
INVOCATION AND PLEDGE
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, gave the Invocation and led the Pledge of Allegiance.
ADDENDUM NO. 1
CLOSED SESSION - UPDATE ON LITIGATION ISSUES
At 9:06 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for a Closed Session, for the purpose of receiving an update from the County Attorney regarding litigation issues.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 9:35 a.m., the Chairman reconvened the Board Meeting, however, announced that the Board would take a five minute recess.
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved the County Manager’s Consent Agenda, Tabs 1 through 3, plus Addendum No. 1, as follows:
Economic Development and Tourism
Request for approval to accept Local Arts Agency Grant No.05-8014, in the amount of $3,056.00, for the Cultural Affairs Council’s Marketing Program, for calendar year July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005.
Procurement Services
Request for approval of the sale of a wheel loader to Highland Tractor Company, Inc., at the guaranteed buy back option of $95,378.00, for the Environmental Services Department.
Public Works
Request for approval and authorization to accept the final plat for Orange Tree, Phase 5 Subdivision, and all areas dedicated to the public, as shown on the Orange Tree, Phase 5 plat; accept a Letter of Credit for Construction of Improvements, in the amount of $285,764.93; and accept a Developer’s Agreement for Construction of Improvements between Lake County and the Greater Construction Corporation. Orange Tree, Phase 5 consists of 44 lots - Commission District 2.
ADDENDUM NO. 1 (CONT’D.)
COUNTY MANAGER’S CONSENT AGENDA
Public Works
Request for approval and authorization to accept the final plat for Rose of Eldorado and all areas dedicated to the public, as shown on the Rose of Eldorado plat. Rose of Eldorado consists of 10 lots - Commission District 4.
PRESENTATION - HARRIS CHAIN OF LAKES RESTORATION COUNCIL
CHAIRMAN HUGH DAVIS
Mr. Hugh Davis, Chairman, Harris Chain of Lakes Restoration Council, presented the Board with a Resolution (No. 2004-1) from the Harris Chain of Lakes Restoration Council acknowledging and commending the officials and staff of Lake County for their contributions and assistance provided to the Council in its efforts of environmental protection and restoration of the Harris Chain of Lakes.
PRESENTATION - PROPOSED LANGUAGE REGARDING SCHOOL IMPACT
FEES BY MS. NORA THOMPSON
Ms. Nora Thompson, an interested citizen of Lake County, addressed the Board and presented them with some proposed language that she felt should be placed before the Lake County electorate, as follows:
We, the Lake County School Board, ask the Lake County Board of Commissioners to join us immediately in requesting a November 2004 General Election vote to place the following item before the Lake County electorate:
We, the voters of Lake County, agree that an impact fee be placed on newly built family homes in Lake County:
$10,750 for single units
$ 7,500 for multiple units
This impact fee will be used to fund adequate school facilities to provide for the County’s growing school population. This impact fee will be reevaluated and adjusted up or down every two years from passage to meet future school growth needs of Lake County students.
Ms. Thompson stated that she hoped to hear something from the Board regarding her proposal.
No action was taken at this time.
PUBLIC HEARING -VACATION
PETITION NO. 1029 - FRANCE KOON - SORRENTO AREA
Mr. Jim Stivender, Jr., Senior Director, Public Works, presented this request, stating that it was a request to vacate a portion of Strawberry Avenue, in the Sorrento area, at which time he displayed and reviewed a plat of the property in question (contained in the Board’s backup material), noting that there have been a lot of vacations occurring in said plat over the past 20 years. He stated that staff has looked into the matter and was recommending approval to vacate said road and that the County had a petition supporting that position.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2004-127 - Vacation Petition No. 1029, by France Koon, to vacate a portion of Strawberry Avenue, in the Plat of Craig’s Addition to Sorrento, located in Section 30, Township 19 South, Range 28 East, in the Mt. Plymouth area - Commission District 4.
PUBLIC HEARINGS - REZONINGS
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, addressed the Board stating that the County received a request for postponement of Rezoning Case No. PH42-04-2, Chancery Lane, Ltd./Bailes Properties/D. LaCrosse, Tracking No. 45-04-Z, until the September 28, 2004 Board Meeting; and that Rezoning Case No. PH47-04-4, Carrol and Renelda Gatch, Lake County Board of County Commissioners/Department of Public Works, was being withdrawn.
The Chairman opened the public hearing regarding Rezoning Case No. PH42-04-2, Chancery Lane, Ltd./Bailes Properties/D. LaCrosse, and a request for postponement of said case until the Board Meeting of September 28, 2004.
No one was present in opposition to the request for postponement.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to postpone said case until September 28, 2004.
REZONING CASE NO. PH39-04-4 - A TO R-3 - DONNA MARSHALL, TRUSTEE,
MAY AND WHITAKER FAMILY PARTNERSHIP, LTD. AND JOHN B.
WHITAKER, TRUSTEE/STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A. - TRACKING NO. 42-04-Z
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it was coming back before the Board from a 60 day postponement. He stated that it was a request to rezone 62 acres, located directly north of the Biscayne Heights subdivision, in the Grand Island area, from A (Agriculture) to R-3 (Medium Residential District). He stated that the property is located in the Urban Expansion land use category and will be provided with central water, but will be on individual septic tanks, noting that it is within the City of Eustis water utility area, but not within their sewer service. He stated that staff’s recommendation was for approval of the request and that the Zoning Board had recommended approval, as well, by a 6-0 vote.
It was noted that there were some concerns from the Lake County School Board (contained in the Board’s backup material), which were discussed at the Zoning Board Meeting.
Commrs. Hill, Pool, and Stivender disclosed, for the record, that they had met with the applicant’s representative prior to this meeting.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that he had been before them 60 days prior to this meeting and a question was posed to him at that time as to whether the School Board had accepted the gap funding proposal that had been approved by this Board. He stated that the Board directed him to check with the School Board regarding the matter, however, two weeks later the School Board came before them and advised them that they were accepting the gap funding. He stated that the applicant is willing to pay the impact fee, or the gap funding, whichever is legally established. He asked the Board to approve the request, based on the fact that the applicant is doing what the School Board indicated they are willing to accept, noting that whichever puts the greatest burden on the applicant is what they are willing to abide by. He stated that another thing that was mentioned is that two years ago a question was raised on a rezoning case involving a parcel of property located next to the parcel in question, with regard to the City of Eustis and whether it had the ability to service the area with central water and sewer, at which time he noted that the property is not located within the City’s service area for sewer, so they will not be servicing it.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Egor Emery, representing the Lake County Conservation Council, addressed the Board stating that the Council continues to oppose this kind of rezoning, noting that they would like to see projects that are Urban in nature included in Urban areas. He stated that Mr. Richey explained that the City of Eustis has decided to withdraw their service boundaries and the Council is concerned that the County needs to take care of its resources, by ensuring that the applicant recycle as much as it can, which he noted they cannot do, unless they have a central sewer system. He stated that the Council considers an R-3 zoning to be Urban and would like the County to have a policy that puts Urban development inside Urban boundaries, with Urban services.
Mr. Richey readdressed the Board stating that the property is within an Urban Expansion area, which allows up to four units per acre, not Urban, as indicated by Mr. Emery. He stated that the development will have less than three units per acre, which is consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan, and asked that the applicants be allowed to develop their property, as requested.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-58, Donna Marshall, Trustee/May and Whitaker Family Partnership, Ltd./John B. Whitaker, Trustee/Steven J. Richey, P.A.,Rezoning Case No. PH39-04-4,Tracking No. 42-04-Z, a request to rezone 62 acres in the Grand Island area from A (Agriculture) to R-3 (Medium Residential District), as presented.
Commr. Hanson requested that staff provide the Board, along with their backup material, information regarding where the Joint Planning Areas and the Chapter 180 Utility Districts are located.
REZONING CASE NO. PH51-04-2 - A TO PUD - SADIE BALGOBIN/NMK
HOLDINGS, INC./GREG BELIVEAU, AICP/LPG URBAN ®IONAL
PLANNERS, INC. - TRACKING NO. 54-04-PUD
Ms. Shannon Suffron, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it was a request to rezone from A (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development). She stated that the subject parcel is located in the Four Corners region of south Lake County, east of U.S. 27 and west of the Silver Creek development (Woodcrest Way). She stated that the parcel consists of approximately 10 acres, is located in the Urban land use category, which permits up to seven dwelling units per acre, and central water and sewer is available to the property. She stated that the proposed rezoning is consistent with the Lake County Land Development Regulations (LDRs) and the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and is compatible with the surrounding land use and development patterns. She stated that the Zoning Board unanimously recommended approval of the request and staff was recommending approval, as well.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, LPG Urban and Regional Planners, Inc., representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that, at the Zoning Board Meeting, the applicant was requested by the subdivision that is adjacent to the property in question to the east to look at their access, to try to utilize an access point that would be more conducive and less intrusive into their subdivision, which he noted they have done, by revising their access, at which time he displayed and reviewed an aerial (Applicant’s Exhibit A) of said property, showing said revision, noting that they are doing a 50 foot right of way, with a curb and gutter street system that will provide additional distance between the houses and their access pavement, which the adjacent property owners find to be acceptable.
It was noted that the subject property is basically surrounded by PUDs containing 3.5 to 4.5 dwelling units per acre and are pretty much built out.
Mr. Beliveau stated that the applicant was requesting that the point system to define the density up to 5.5 dwelling units per acre be calculated at the time of construction, the reason being that the County’s fire department is currently going through an ISO evaluation and the ISO ratings may change, which would garnish the applicants more points through the fire rating system and lessen their dependence on affordable housing. He stated that they are trying to keep their affordable housing units down, the reason being school impacts, noting that they are going to set aside ten units for single family houses and, if they can reduce it further, will reduce it to five. He stated that his testimony would pertain to the next rezoning case, as well, and, in the essence of time, due to the Board’s full agenda, asked that it be noted, rather than having to repeat the testimony.
Ms. Kim Howard, with D. R. Horton, Inc., addressed the Board stating that they have control over the Silver Creek property, located to the east of the proposed development. She stated that they expressed their concerns regarding the access issue at the Zoning Board hearing and wanted to state, for the record, that they approved of the new plan that Mr. Beliveau had just shown them, showing a 24 foot paved and curved road, with no sidewalks, leading into the access of Tract B through Silver Creek.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-59,Sadie Balgobin /NMK Holdings, Inc./Greg Beliveau, AICP, LPG Urban & Regional Planners, Inc., Rezoning Case No. PH51-04-2, Tracking No. 54-04-PUD, a request to rezone approximately 10 acres from A (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development),with a stipulation that the applicant abide by the rules and regulations set forth, including the impact fees and/or gap fee, if necessary, as well as a requirement that there be a points evaluation done at the time of development and that the 30% of the units that will be set aside for affordable housing not be used for short-term rentals or timeshares.
REZONING CASE NO. PH52-04-2 - A TO PUD - SADIE BALGOBIN/NMK
HOLDINGS, INC./GREG BELIVEAU, AICP, LPG URBAN & REGIONAL
PLANNERS, INC. - TRACKING NO. 55-04-PUD
Ms. Shannon Saffron, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it involved the same applicants. She stated that the request was the same, to rezone from A (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), and the parcel is located in the same area as the previous parcel, however, it consists of approximately 20 acres, as opposed to the approximately 10 acres involved with the previous request. She stated that the same conditions apply and the applicant is asking for the same density. She stated that the Zoning Board recommended approval, by a 5-0 vote, and staff was recommending approval, as well.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, LPG Urban and Regional Planners, Inc., representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that the testimony he gave for the previous case pertained to this case, as well. He stated that the applicants have worked out the same access issue with the adjacent property owners and would like to have the same caveat placed in the Ordinance, being that the point system to define the density up to 5.5 dwelling units per acre be calculated at the time of construction.
Commr. Hill questioned whether Mr. Beliveau had seen the language that the Lake County School Board submitted regarding the school impact fee and whether he was comfortable with it, to which he responded that he was.
It was noted that 40% or more of the entire development consists of open space.
Commr. Cadwell questioned Mr. Greg Mihalic, Director of Economic Development and Tourism, as to whether the County separates out short-term rentals, with regard to collection of the tourist tax, and whether there was any way to find out what they generate and was informed by Mr. Mihalic that they are required to pay the tourist tax, noting that anything with a six month or less lease is required to pay it; however, he informed Commr. Cadwell that said information is protected from the public, by law.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-60, Sadie Balgobin/NMK Holdings, Inc./Greg Beliveau, AICP, LPG Urban & Regional Planners, Inc.,Rezoning Case No. PH52-04-2,Tracking No. 55-04-PUD, a request to rezone approximately 20 acres from A (Agriculture) to PUD (Planned Unit Development), as presented.
REZONING CASE NO. PH32-04-3 - AMEND EXISTING PUD - ROBERT
BEUCHER/SONOMA CONSTRUCTORS, LTD./ LAS COLINAS/FARNER BARLEY
& ASSOCIATES - TRACKING NO. 31-04-PUD
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it was a request to amend the Mission Inn PUD, to recognize an additional 21 acres and the ability to do multi-family residential town home condominium units as a housing type and to provide for the overall maximum density of the project, regardless of the housing type, etc. He stated that, as long as the number of dwelling units remains the same for the entire PUD, there is not much of a change, other than the addition of the acreage and the recognition of an alternative housing type. He stated that the total acreage for the Mission Inn PUD will be 598 acres, it is consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan, and it is on central water and sewer. He stated that the Zoning Board recommended approval of the request, by a 5-0 vote, and staff was recommending approval, as well. He noted that there was no increase in the number of units; therefore, the Lake County School System would not be impacted.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Gary Fox, representing Sonoma Constructors, Ltd., addressed the Board to answer any questions they might have regarding the case.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-61,Robert Beucher/Sonoma Constructors/Las Colinas/Farner Barley& Associates, Rezoning Case No. PH32-04-3,Tracking No. 31-04-PUD, a request to amend existing PUD (Planned Unit Development) conditions, as presented.
REZONING CASE NO. PH49-04-2 - A +CUP NO. 03/4/1-2 TO R-4 - ARNOLD
GROVES & RANCH, LLC/JOHN R. ARNOLD, TRUSTEE/STEVEN J. RICHEY
P.A., TRACKING NO. 52-04-Z
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it was a request to rezone from A (Agriculture) plus CUP No. 03/4/1-2 to R-4 (Medium Suburban Residential). He stated that the subject parcel is located in the area south of the Clermont city limits and north of the Four Corners region and is in the Urban Expansion land use category, which permits up to four dwelling units per acre. He stated that it consists of approximately 120 acres, with approximately 40 acres of wetlands, and is adjacent to a PUD to the south, an existing subdivision (Tradd’s Landing) to the west, and an agricultural sludge spreading operation to the north and east. He stated that the applicant is aware of the current agricultural operation and its practices and central water and sewer are currently being used in the existing subdivision and would be used in the proposed development. He stated that access to the subject parcel would be via the existing subdivision road network, which would come off of U.S. 27 and access the property. He stated that staff has conducted the Urban Area Residential Density Chart Analysis and the total points awarded for the project will be 45, which will allow 3.5 dwelling units per acre, even though the R-4 would permit four dwelling units per acre. He stated that the estimated number of units for the proposed subdivision would be approximately 288. He stated that, with regard to the current sludge spreading operation, the setbacks will be increased to 350 feet, if the project is approved. He stated that the County’s Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations support the applicant’s request. He stated that the Zoning Board recommended approval of the request, by a 5-0 vote, and staff was recommending approval, as well.
Commrs. Hill, Stivender, Pool, and Hanson disclosed, for the record, that they had spoken with the applicant’s representative regarding the case prior to this meeting.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that the PUD is under construction, noting that the roads are in and houses are being built at four units to the acre, contiguous to the property in question. He stated that the area is Urban Expansion and the 120 acres involved with this request is the last piece of Urban Expansion that fronts U.S. 27. He stated that the property will be used in conjunction with the PUD at some future date, thus, the reason the applicant is rezoning it at this time. He stated that the sludge operation is currently on the property, however, noted that, once it ceases, the applicant will be amending the CUP to delete the 120 acres. He stated that it will then be one year before any residential development can be approved for the property, under the Department of Environmental Protection’s rules, and will be a couple of years before the 120 acres can be utilized as part of the contiguous property. He stated that the property to the south is being developed by U.S. Homes/Lennar and the property in question will become part of that project at some future date.
Commr. Hanson interjected that she felt staff needs to be looking at the open space requirements, so there can be more clustering.
Mr. Richey noted that one-third of the property is going to be set aside for open space.
Ms. Nancy Fullerton, Chairman, Alliance to Protect Water Resources, addressed the Board stating that she would like for it to be on record that she feels the Four Corners area of the County has escaped the proper attention that it should have received, with all its development, as far as its potential impact to the Green Swamp Area of Critical State Concern. She stated that all of that area is in the Lake Wales Ridge, which is the highest recharge area in Lake County. She stated that the Alliance was requesting that a study, or some type of workshop, be held or initiated by the County, to take a look at all the proposed development that is on the books moving down the Lake Wales Ridge along U.S. 27 and west of the Horizons West property in Orange County. She stated that she has talked to the District, to the Department of Community Affairs, and to the Growth Management staff and it was her understanding that a huge development that was at one time called Lexington Place is on the books. She stated that she did not know if the County was doing a study on the potential impact of said growth, but that it looked to her like this was the first step in another hit and miss unplanned development moving south.
Commr. Hanson interjected that she felt that was another reason the County needs to look at open space and clustering.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council would be the best forum for looking at the boundary between Lake County and what is happening on the Orange County side and further south, so that it is not just Lake County looking at it.
Ms. Fullerton stated that she feels the County’s Growth Management Department has known about said development and she does not feel it is good that the County is not planning for it, or even giving out information about it, so that people will know what is coming. She stated that, as growth comes down U.S. 27, there are going to have to be some huge engineering methods put in place to ensure recharge.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he feels, with the development that is happening on the Lake County side, there is enough room for buffering, as opposed to blending, and still have a Rural area between the two Urban areas, however, noted that he feels it is something, as a Board, they can look at, as well as the Land Planning Agency, when they are doing the Comprehensive Plan.
Commr. Pool informed Ms. Fullerton that Polk County is sitting on the highest recharge area in the State, not Lake County, noting that he was not disputing that Lake County does not recharge, but the highest and best areas of recharge are along the U.S. 27 corridor, in Polk County.
Mr. Egor Emery, a member of the Lake County Conservation Council, addressed the Board stating that he echoed Ms. Fullerton’s comments. He stated that the applicant has various reasons for wanting to rezone his property, however, noted that his concern is about what the community is obligated to in the future. He stated that he understood the nature of the debate between community interests and property owners, but asked that the Board interject the community back into the debate.
Commr. Hanson stated that the Land Acquisition Program could play a part in creating some of the buffers.
Commr. Cadwell informed Mr. Richey that, with the straight zoning and it not being part of the PUD, along with some of the other issues that were brought up, he had some real concerns about this request
Mr. Richey stated that the applicant owns 2,000 acres in the area in question and the Board has been very helpful in having him preserve those 2,000 acres in agricultural uses. He stated that the subject property is the only parcel that he owns that is Urban Expansion, which allows him to sell it and make a return off the property, but he has no desire to do anything other than to continue to farm and operate his agricultural use. He stated that his ability to sell his 120 acres will allow him, financially, to continue his farming operation and protect the 2,000 acres, which he holds dear, in an agricultural use. He stated that he felt it was important that staff coordinate what is going on in Orange County and that Lake County have some kind of plan for interconnective roads and services. He stated that he has been attending the Horizons West meetings and has been advising the County’s staff as to when said meetings are taking place, because Lake County does not always get that information. He stated that he talked to the East Central Florida Regional Planning Council about trying to bring Lake County to the table over the next couple of years and would hope that it would happen. He stated that, with the open space involved with this parcel of property, based on indigenous environmental factors that are in place and the fact that it is contiguous to development that is going to be a higher density than what the applicant can put on his property, asked that the Board approve the request and have the applicant pay his fair share of the school impact fees, as he already indicated he would do. He stated that the 2,000 acres does not meet the County’s locational criteria for schools, based on the rural nature of it, however, noted that school sites are being made available to the School Board within one mile of the property in question. He stated that the applicant is asking for straight zoning, because he has already exceeded the open space requirement of the PUD. He stated that the applicant is going to be on central water and sewer and is going to be integrated into an existing development and the traffic is going to be going through that existing development, based on their collector road system, out to one point on U.S. 27.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried, by a 4-1 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-62, Arnold Groves & Ranch, Ltd./John Arnold/Steven J. Richey, P.A.,Rezoning Case No. PH49-04-2,Tracking No. 52-04-Z, a request to rezone 120 acres in the South Clermont/Four Corners Area from A (Agriculture) + CUP (Conditional Use Permit) No. 03/4/1-2 to R-4 (Medium Suburban Residential), as presented.
Commr. Cadwell voted “No”.
OTHER BUSINESS
CREATION OF PRECINCT NO. 100 IN FERNDALE
Ms. Emogene Stegall, Lake County Supervisor of Elections, addressed the Board and requested approval to create Precinct No. 100, in Ferndale, noting that the Legislature gave the County three House Districts, creating the need for said precinct, to prevent having any split ballots in that precinct.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to place said item on the Agenda
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved said request.
REZONING (CONT’D.)
REZONING CASE NO. SLPA 04/6/1-3 - AMENDMENT TO FUTURE LAND USE
MAP - ANDERSON COLUMBIA COMPANY, INC./BRUCE DUNCAN, ESQUIRE
TRACKING NO. 66-04-SLPA
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that the applicant is seeking an amendment to the Future Land Use Map for a 5.1 acre parcel of property and is requesting a change from Urban to Employment Center designation, to utilize the property for a concrete batch plant. He stated that the property is located in the north Groveland area, at U.S. 27 and O’Brien Road. He stated that staff has reviewed the request and, based on the County’s Comprehensive Plan Policy regarding the availability of central water and sewer to the project, which has not been confirmed, as well as the fact that it does not meet commercial locational criteria, under Policy 1-1.14, which states that it must be accessible to arterial roadways, either by direct access or via an internal street system within a planned industrial area, they were recommending denial of the request. He stated that, located to the east of the proposed development is a 999 unit residential development, to the west is a peat mining operation, and to the south is an LM ( ) use which has not yet been developed. He stated that the Local Planning Agency made a motion for approval of the request, however, it failed, by a 1-7 vote.
Commrs. Hill, Stivender, Hanson, and Pool disclosed, for the record, that they met with the applicant’s representative prior to this meeting.
Mr. Bruce Duncan, Attorney, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that his client has been in the State of Florida for a long period of time, primarily in the Panhandle, however, noted that they have recently merged two companies in the Panhandle and are looking to expand their operations further south. He stated that the property is located approximately one-half mile from the County’s industrial park (Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park), where it accesses the park from U.S. 27. He stated that the applicants own some additional industrial property along O’Brien Road, between the proposed site and U.S. 27, on the north side of O’Brien Road. He stated that Lennar Homes is located directly behind the property in question, at which time he noted that he submitted to the Zoning Board a letter from Lennar Homes (contained in the Board’s backup material) indicating that they do not oppose the development of the site for a concrete batch mixing plant. He stated that, initially, the City of Groveland issued a letter (Applicant’s Exhibit A) objecting to the request, based on the fact that it was located within their utility service area and they were concerned about the environment, which he submitted, for the record. He stated that it is approximately eight miles from the existing city limits of the City of Groveland. He stated that he was not sure whether the property is located within their utility service area, however, noted that he had a conversation with Mr. Jason Yarborough, City Manager, City of Groveland, explaining to him what the applicants planned to do with their property and he indicated that he no longer objects to the project, provided the applicants agree to hook up to the City of Groveland’s water and sewer services. He stated that the applicants do not have a problem with doing so, however, noted that they are going to hook up to whatever water and sewer services are accessible first. He stated that he felt the Town of Howey-in-the-Hills might be providing said services for Lennar Homes and, if that is the case, the applicants might be able to obtain it quicker from Lennar Homes on the back side.
Mr. Jim Maples, President, A Materials Group, Inc., who is in the business of producing and delivering ready mixed concrete and who is an affiliate of Anderson Columbia, Inc., the owner of the property that is subject to the proposed land use change, addressed the Board stating that Anderson Columbia is in the business of constructing roads and bridges and performing site development and paving for large commercial projects. He stated that the principals of Anderson Columbia are also the owners of other affiliated businesses, which are engaged in the manufacture of cement and the production of construction aggregates. He stated that the cement, rock, and sand that is produced by the affiliated companies make up the primary raw materials that his company requires for the production of ready mixed concrete. He stated that A Materials Group operates eight ready mixed concrete plants in north Florida, which are located from the eastern Panhandle across north Florida to Duval County, and are undertaking an expansion down into the Central Florida area. He gave the Board a brief overview of how concrete is produced, at which time he displayed several (4) photographs (Applicant’s Exhibit B) of one of their concrete plants that was built in 1999, when Anderson Columbia Concrete Company was first created. He stated that he has been involved in the concrete producing business all his life, noting that his family operated several ready mix plants and bought plants in north Florida and south Georgia, which he worked in, and, after graduating from college, managed the family business for 27 years, until it was sold to a large publicly traded company. He stated that the concrete plants being constructed today are much more technologically advanced and cleaner than the facilities were when he first got into the business and they are landscaped and utilize the best industry practices and the most technology, which enables them to produce to more exacting standards, while eliminating fugitive dust and recycling all of the industrial wastewater and a large majority of the stormwater that falls onto the properties. He stated that the plant shown in the photographs was larger and had a higher profile than the proposed plant, however, noted that the operation of it is fairly typical of concrete plants.
It was noted that the land use plan amendment and the rezoning request were being presented together.
Mr. Duncan readdressed the Board and displayed a Site Plan (Applicant’s Exhibit C) for the proposed plant, which he reviewed with the Board and submitted, for the record. He stated that, in addition to collecting fugitive dust, the applicants will also install a noise buffer that they feel will be extremely sufficient, noting that, along the entire property line that buffers against the Lennar Homes development, a 12 foot high concrete sound barrier wall will be constructed and landscaping will be installed on the exterior side of the 12 foot wall, so there will be a double buffer on the site. He stated that there was no opposition to the project. He then addressed the issues of wages, impact fees, sewer and water, and transportation, as they relate to the project.
Mr. Mike Springstead, Springstead Engineering, addressed the Board stating that the applicant is required to hook up to central water and sewer, when available, but, at the present time, a septic tank is proposed for what will be municipal type waste. He stated that water usage from the on-site well is estimated to be approximately 25,000 gallons per day, a little more than what would be generated from houses, if the property were designed for seven units per acre. He discussed how the applicant will handle rainwater runoff, noting that the site is required to be permitted through the Department of Environmental Protection (DEP). He stated that no endangered species were found on the property and there will be minimal impact to natural resources. He stated that they have estimated there will be approximately 150 trips per day (40 cement trucks, plus employee and other traffic) to and from the plant and, in talking with the Public Works Department, it will be less than 1% of the capacity of O’Brien Road at the present time. He stated that they have also discussed with Public Works improving the area where the applicants are proposing to have their entrance to the facility, at which time he noted that they feel the sight stopping distance of a vehicle coming over the bridge is adequate and in accordance with the Department of Transportation standards, therefore, will not pose any threat to public safety.
Commr. Cadwell noted a concern he had about the number of cement trucks that will be traveling up and down O’Brien Road.
Mr. Duncan stated that the applicant will be happy to direct traffic to U.S. 27 with directional signs and noted that the drivers will be educated that they are to access and exit the facility by U.S. 27, as well.
Discussion occurred regarding the reuse of stormwater, at which time Mr. Duncan stated that stormwater, the water that is used to wash off the trucks, and water from the wet ponds is all captured and put into a storage area and used to wet the aggregate, to keep the dust down.
Commr. Hanson questioned whether the applicant could incorporate ground water into their product in the future and was informed that there was a possibility of it.
Commr. Hill questioned the life expectancy of the proposed plant.
Mr. Stan Moore, Gulf Atlantic Industrial Equipment Company, Inc., addressed the Board, in response to Commr. Hill’s question, stating that the average life expectancy of a concrete batch plant is 15 to 25 years, due to the fact that it is constructed of metal and the material weighs on the metal, which, over time, becomes fatigued and has to be replaced. He displayed a photograph (Applicant’s Exhibit D) of such a plant that was constructed at Interstate 10 and Hwy. 301, in Baldwin, Florida, which he submitted, for the record.
Commr. Hill questioned whether the Board would have any legal standing to put a sunset provision on the project, if it were rezoned to MP (Planned Industrial), or whether it automatically comes with a CUP (Conditional Use Permit), if the applicants were to ask for one.
Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that the Board could limit the duration of the approval in an MP (Planned Industrial) zoning.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board overturned the Local Planning Agency’s recommendation of denial and approved Ordinance No. 2004-63, Anderson Columbia Company, Inc., Bruce Duncan, Esquire, Rezoning Case No. SLPA04/6/1-3, Tracking No. 66-04-SLPA, a request for approval of an Amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for a 5.1 acre parcel in the north Groveland area from Urban to Employment Center.
REZONING CASE NO. PH40-04-3 - A + CUP NO. 93/9/1-2 TO PLANNED
INDUSTRIAL - ANDERSON COLUMBIA COMPANY, INC./BRUCE DUNCAN,
ESQUIRE - TRACKING NO. 41-04-MP
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this case, stating that it was a request to rezone the acreage addressed in the prior case, being 5.1 acres, located in the north Groveland area, from A (Agriculture) + CUP No. 93/9/1-2 to Planned Industrial (MP). He stated that staff was recommending denial of the request, based on the central water and sewer requirements, however, noted that, now that the applicant has the future land use in place, the Board could review the attached ordinance and make changes to it, should they approve this request.
Commr. Stivender questioned whether the Board could put into the ordinance a requirement that the applicant be required to hook up to water and sewer, when it becomes available, at which time Mr. Sandy Minkoff, County Attorney, stated that he felt the Board should specifically outline the changes to the Ordinance.
Mr. Kruse noted the changes, as follows:
On Page 2, under Item I. B. - Public Facilities, add Paragraph 3, stating the following:
“Access shall be to and from U.S. 27, with the design to be right in with left out only.”
On Page 3, under Item I. E. - Landscaping/Buffering Requirements, change the height of the wall between the PUD and the subject property from six (6) feet to twelve (12) feet.
Mr. Bruce Duncan, Attorney, representing the applicant, stated that his client will exceed the County’s landscape requirements, especially along the Lennar Homes buffer, noting that the landscaping will contain a mixture of trees that will be staggered, for a more natural look, such as the landscaping that is found along the Florida Turnpike.
Commr. Hanson asked that no water oaks be planted, due to the fact that they wreak such havoc during hurricanes.
Commr. Hill stated that she would like to see the Board place a sunset provision on the project; however, it was determined that it would not be needed, because the facility’s life expectancy would limit the project.
Commr. Hanson stated that, in reading the Minutes of the Local Planning Agency, the requirement of projects such as this one to be internal to another industrial park are very limiting to the County, because there are not many industrial parks in the County. She stated that the County is saying there cannot be a light industry, or MP (Planned Commercial),use located on an exterior road and she feels staff needs to look at that and where to designate other industrial parks, if that is what the County is going to require. She stated that the County needs to have some sort of inducement for the private sector to provide this type of tax base, which it currently does not have.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the Board needs to set aside some areas in the County that it is understood will be industrial.
Commr. Stivender directed staff to work on it and bring something back to the Board at a later date.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Zoning Board and approved Ordinance No. 2004-64,Anderson Columbia Company, Inc./Bruce Duncan, Esquire, Rezoning Case No. PH40-04-3,Tracking No. 41-04-MP, A (Agriculture) + CUP (Conditional Use Permit) No. 93/9/1-2 to MP (Planned Industrial), as amended, with a stipulation that the applicant’s truck traffic be required to utilize U.S. 27, rather than S.R. 19; that the design of the access lanes be constructed with a right in/left out only; and that the wall to be constructed between the PUD and the subject property be a minimum of 12 feet, rather than 6 feet.
RECESS AND REASSEMBLY
At 11:25 a.m., the Chairman announced that the Board would recess for 15 minutes.
VOLUNTARY REVOCATION OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMITS (CUPS) -
TRACKING NO. 56-034CUP/REV
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, addressed the Board stating that they had before them a request for the voluntary revocation of four (4) Conditional Use Permits, however, noted that staff needed to verify that they did, in deed, have on file a voluntary revocation letter for CUP 01/1/4-5 , Carl and Cheryl Krause, therefore, would be pulling it from the request.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request for approval of the voluntary revocations.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Ordinance No. 2004-65, Voluntary Revocation of Conditional Use Permits, Tracking No. 56-034CUP/REV, as follows:
CUP 89/6/1-2
Frederick Armagost
CUP01/1/4-5
Barney and Gloria Newbern
CUP01/11/5-4
Doris Daugharty
TRANSMITTAL OF LAND USE PLAN AMENDMENTS TO LAKE COUNTY
COMPREHENSIVE PLAN TO THE DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY AFFAIRS
LAND PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 04/5/2-2 - CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
FROM RURAL TO URBAN EXPANSION - HART FAMILY, LLC/STEVEN J.
RICHEY, P.A. - TRACKING NO. 4-04-LPA
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this request, stating that the applicant is seeking a change to the present Future Land Use Map (FLUM) designation for a 142 acre parcel lying within Section 10, Township 23 South, Range 26 East, in the Clermont area, from Rural to Urban Expansion. He stated that, if the Future Land Use Map Amendment is approved, the applicant then wishes to develop the property for residential purposes. He stated that the property fronts on two collector roads, Hancock Road and Hartwood Marsh Road, and abuts the corporate limits of the City of Clermont to the north, west, and south. The property is primarily surrounded by high-density residential development, adjoining the Kings Ridge, Hartwood Pines, and Regency Hills subdivisions, all located within the Clermont city limits, and the Tarmac sand mine lies to the east of the property. He stated that staff reviewed the request and found it to be consistent with the County’s Comprehensive Plan; therefore, they were recommending approval, with conditions. He stated that there was some concern that the City of Clermont would like the applicant to annex the property into the City limits and be assigned city land use and zoning designations, as well as develop to city standards; however, staff maintains that the County cannot require the applicant to annex into the City. He stated that resolution of this issue must be achieved by the applicant and the City. He stated that, as no annexation agreement has been reached to date, staff must evaluate the application for consistency with the Lake County Comprehensive Plan and Land Development Regulations only. He noted that the Local Planning Agency approved the request, by a 5-2 vote.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that the applicant’s intent is to come back before the Board with a Planned Unit Development (PUD), for the property to be utilized as residential, consistent with what surrounds it; however, the property is located within the City of Clermont’s Section 180 utility district and is partly surrounded by the City, so the City wants the applicant to annex it into the City, but the applicant’s position is that the property is located in the County and the Joint Planning Agreement (JPA) does not require them to annex, so they want to enjoy the benefits of being in the County and developing their property, at least Comprehensive Plan wise, pursuant to the County’s rules and regulations. He stated that, if they are obligated to get their utilities from the City, it is an issue they will deal with at a later date. He stated that the question before the Board this date is whether the proposed use is compatible with the existing land uses in the area and can the applicant justify increasing the density from the current designation of Rural to Urban Expansion, based on the underlying uses in the area. He stated that he feels they have provided information to staff and the Local Planning Agency to justify that use and feel comfortable that they can justify it to the State, as well. He stated that later on, when they come back to the Board with their rezoning request, they are going to have to deal with the issues of utilities, densities, and intensities, but that is not before the Board this date - all that is before the Board this date is land use. He stated that the property was presented to the Board last year, but the County had not been provided information to show the justification for increasing density and intensity. He stated that the applicant has since provided staff with significant information about what is going on in the area and why an Urban Expansion designation is compatible with the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Greg Beliveau, Land Planning Group, Inc., representing the applicant, addressed the Board and discussed growth patterns and what kind of trends are happening in the south Lake County area, noting that they found the growth pattern within the last few years in the area outstripped the current utilization of Urban Expansion in Urban areas, which were designated on the Future Land Use Map. He stated that education was one of the prime points of discussion regarding this request, when it went before the Local Planning Agency, due to the growth patterns in the south Lake County area and the fact that their schools are overcrowded. He stated that, in looking at the request, they found there is a growth trend going on in that area, which is historic and has been consistent. He stated that those growth patterns and projections justify that the area is going to be converting from Agriculture to Urban Expansion and Urban and the Board is going to be looking at it when they do their new Future Land Use Map. He stated that, as county staff indicated, the property is surrounded on three sides by Urban and there are Urban Expansion areas on two sides and the areas that are not abutted by the County are abutted by the City of Clermont, with densities that are equal to, or greater, than the request before the Board this date. He stated that road access is sufficient, noting that a traffic analysis was submitted that supports it and they comply with all concurrency and levels of service requirements. He stated that it comes down to two issues, being utilities and education.
Mr. Beliveau submitted, for the record, a letter (Applicant’s Exhibit A) from Ms. Octavio J. Visjedo, Chairman of the Board, Imagine Schools, to Mr. and Mrs. Darryl Ladd, Highland Real Estate and Investments, Inc., dated July 9, 2004, indicating that she looks forward to finalizing their agreement to secure up to 10 acres of the property in question, for the purpose of building a 750 seat elementary school and a 700 seat middle school, which illustrates that the applicant has responded to the education issue, at which time he noted that the elementary school has already been approved by the Lake County School Board. He stated that the impact fees to be paid by the applicant will more than compensate for the few high school students that will live in the area, noting that having charter schools does not take away the impact fees, so all the impact fees that will be generated by this project can go to the high school, which will more than compensate for their impact to the area. He stated that the project will produce more fees to the School Board, both with the current fees and the proposed fees, to overcompensate. He noted that there are no credits for impact fees, when one constructs a charter school. He stated that the only other area of dispute is that of utilities, which he deferred to Mr. Richey, due to the applicant’s ongoing battle with the City of Clermont regarding same.
Mr. Richey informed the Board that, if the City of Clermont chooses not to service the applicant’s property with utilities, the applicant has the right to provide its own service, noting that they cannot be precluded from developing because the City does not want to service the property under their Section 180 utility district. He stated that a letter was contained in the Board’s backup material that states that Lake Utilities has the capacity and is willing to service the property, if the City chooses not to service it, however, noted that the applicant may have to resolve the problem in a forum other than before this Board. He stated that there are some areas of conflict between the applicant and the City, one being that they do not like clustering, with regard to small lots, noting that they have minimal lot sizes, which is incompatible with clustering. He stated that things such as that are going to have to be worked out in those joint rules and he feels comfortable, before the project comes back before the Board, that they will have worked it out.
Mr. Wayne Saunders, City Manager, City of Clermont, addressed the Board stating that he was present representing the City Council, at which time he referred to a letter that the City submitted to the County, after reviewing the request before them this date, indicating that the Council recommends that no changes be made to the Future Land Use Map until the JPA Land Development Regulations and the JPA Land Use Map Amendments are adopted, noting that they have taken said position on more than one land use change for property within the Joint Planning Area. He stated that he was not present to argue the appropriate use for the Hart property, noting that what the applicant is requesting may be the appropriate use, it is just that they started a great process when they adopted the Joint Planning Agreement, but it is not worth a lot, unless the two components are completed, one of which is the adoption of the LDRs, which he feels they are close to having in place. He stated that one of the most important things that makes the JPA work is the Future Land Use Map and, until the Board adopts a new Future Land Use Map for the Joint Planning Area, it will be more of the same - piecemeal land use changes and rezonings, without a clear picture of what the area should be in the future. He stated that that is what the Council’s whole issue is, noting that they would like to let the process play out what was started with the JPAs, get the LDRs in place, and, more importantly, get the future land use in place for the area, so that staff has time to bring back to the Board a document stating what the uses should be. He stated that, with regard to the issue of education, he was asking that the Board not let the idea of a school overshadow the real issue, which is what is the correct use for the property.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he felt, for the spirit of the JPA, the Board should wait to make a decision regarding this request, in honor of the City of Clermont’s request.
Mr. Richey readdressed the Board stating that the City of Clermont is still processing Comprehensive Plan Amendments within their City, but they want the Board to enact a moratorium for the County. He stated that the only action being requested this date is to send the request to the State, for their comments. He stated that what the applicant is requesting may be appropriate for the area and suggested that the Board give them the benefit of the doubt and let the request be transmitted to the State and have everyone concerned deal with it over the next three or four months.
It was noted that the Board has not relinquished their ability to make rezoning changes, or Comprehensive Plan Amendments, in the JPA, which is still clearly in the hands of the County.
Commr. Pool interjected that he feels, if the County transmits the request to the State and gets two school sites out of it, it will be a win/win situation for everyone involved.
Mr. Saunders readdressed the Board stating that the important thing is the Future Land Use Map, noting that it dictates what the uses should be. He suggested that the Board take a stand and not approve any more amendments to the Future Land Use Map until the joint LDRs are in place, noting that it would make all the cities get in gear and get them adopted, so that they are not holding up any projects.
Commr. Hanson questioned whether Mr. Saunders had a recommendation regarding the future land use of the property and was informed that he was present representing the City Council and that he had delivered the message that he was asked to deliver. She stated that the choices for the property are Rural, Urban Expansion, Suburban, and Urban, which does not give one very many choices for the future use of the property. She stated that the County is looking at eliminating Suburban, or creating another transition with different regulations, however, noted that, even if it went from Rural to Suburban, it would not be very long before it would meet the criteria of up to three units per acre. She stated that, although the JPA is not in place, the County has the spirit, so the Board needs some alternatives from the City’s Council and staff, rather than just say not to do anything.
Mr. Saunders stated that the City has met with some county staff members, but, until the Board sits down with the map of the whole area and looks at what is existing, what has been built, and what land use changes have already been made in the area, he does not feel that anyone from the Board or the City Council can make a good recommendation. He stated that they are dealing with an area that they all agreed they would try to plan for jointly and they have not done that, at this point in time. He stated that to make an arbitrary recommendation on what the land use should be would be skipping over the main part of the process that they all agreed to go through.
Mr. Bill Neron, County Manager, informed the Board that he would have Mr. Gregg Welstead, Deputy County Manager/Growth Management Director, get with Mr. Saunders and bring back to the Board and the Clermont City Council an expedited time table regarding the matter.
Comm. Hanson interjected that it has been one year since the issue was first discussed and questioned what the delay has been.
Mr. Neron stated that he could not autopsy where the delays have occurred, however, acknowledged that they have occurred and that the issue will be gotten back on track.
Mr. Egor Emery, representing the Lake County Conservation Council, addressed the Board stating that one important issue involved with this request is what is going to happen, in terms of city growth, versus rural lifestyle, noting that it was a very important consideration. He stated that the Board gets to make the ruling on the land use and suggested that they not change it from Rural to Urban Expansion, which he elaborated on, questioning who should control when cities grow. He stated that he felt the County needs to absolutely get out of the Urban development business and stay in the Rural business and let the cities choose when they grow and where they grow. He stated that the Board should say to every single property owner that comes before them that they are not in the Urban development business and direct them to talk to the cities, noting that they should state they are not going to change the land use designations, but leave them the way they are and go with the Comprehensive Plan and enforce it.
Commr. Stivender pointed out the fact that Mr. Emery was asking the Board to go with the County’s Comprehensive Plan, which the Board is doing, noting that the proposed Amendment is consistent with all applicable elements of the Lake County Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Emery stated that that is what staff was recommending, at which time he noted that many times the Board has overruled staff’s recommendation and he was advocating for this to be one of those times, noting that he felt they should say once and for all that they are going to go with what the Comprehensive Plan states at the present time and that they will not change it, without a compelling reason. He stated that, if they say the compelling reason is that the County is going to get a school out of it, that would be fine, but, if the Board went along with that they would be saying that schools are more important than water, traffic, and the Comprehensive Plan. He stated that, if the Board continues to approve such requests, there is no JPA, at which time he urged the Board to save the JPA, by enforcing the Comprehensive Plan this date.
Ms. Nancy Fullerton, representing the Alliance to Protect Water Resources, addressed the Board and asked whether the JPA extends to the Orange County line and was informed that it did. She stated that she felt the problem started in 2002 and that she felt the Hart property is one that should have come up for discussion first, in the early days of fighting over what was happening on Hartwood Marsh Road. She stated that the Board approved in 2002 to change the Rural land use, which was one of the problems, and extend Urban Expansion into Rural areas. She stated that she would guess those properties would still come under the concerns of the JPA and that it would help straighten them out. She stated that the matter of water was the Alliance’s concern in 2002 and continues to be and she did not know how the Board could go on without finding the appropriate uses for properties in the area in question. She stated that the St. Johns River Water Management District (SJRWMD) stated in 2002 that the Floridan Aquifer and the Clermont groundwater basin could not sustain accumulative withdrawals from multiple facilities, without unacceptable impacts happening to the water resources. She questioned whether the Board was accepting the fact that, as long as a school is being provided, the County can grow and grow and grow. She stated that she felt water concurrency is what the Board is going to have to consider, more than schools.
Mr. Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, readdressed the Board and rebutted some of the comments that were made by various individuals regarding this case, at which time he asked the Board to approve transmitting the request to the Department of Community Affairs, for their input. He stated that 90 to 120 days from this day, if the Board feels they do not have enough information, or that the applicant has not progressed far enough, with regard to the JPA, the Board will have the right to not approve the request at that time, which will put pressure on the applicant to continue to work with the City of Clermont, to try to work out the issue of the City providing utilities to the site.
Mr. Saunders readdressed the Board and responded to a comment by Mr. Richey that the City of Clermont was delaying acting on the request for utilities to be provided to the site, because they do not want anything to happen in that area, noting that that has not been the case. He stated that county staff could attest to the fact that the City has consistently requested to move the process along.
It was noted that the Board would not be approving this request, until they receive the comments back from DCA.
On a motion by Commr. Pool, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried, by a 3-2 vote, the Board upheld the recommendation of the Local Planning Agency and approved to transmit to DCA a request for approval of an amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) of the Lake County Comprehensive Plan, changing the land use designation from Rural to Urban Expansion, for the Hart Family, LLC, Steven J. Richey, P.A.,Land Plan Amendment No.04/5/2-2,Tracking No. 4-04-LP.
Commrs. Hanson and Cadwell voted “No”.
LAND PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 03/8/3-3 - CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE MAP
FROM SUBURBAN AND RURAL TO URBAN EXPANSION WITH COMMUNITY
ACTIVITY CENTER OVERLAY - 2001-27 LLC AND GEORGE CORBETT
GREEN CONSULTING GROUP, INC./STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A./TRACKING NO.
75-03-LPA
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this request, stating that the applicants are seeking an amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for a 98 acre parcel (Alternate Key Nos. 3704690 and 1081955), located at the Florida Turnpike and U.S. 27. He stated that they are requesting a change from Suburban and Rural to Urban Expansion and that a Community Commercial designation be placed on the property, where it overlaps the Florida Turnpike and U.S. 27. He stated that, based on the Comprehensive Plan policies and staff’s analysis, they were recommending approval of the request. He noted that the Local Planning Agency recommended approval of the request, as well, by a 7-0 vote.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicants, addressed the Board stating that an Office Employment Center was created contiguous to the property in question to the north some time ago. He stated that the amendment before the Board this date is to take two parcels, one of which is approximately 80% wetlands and the other 26 acres of uplands, located adjacent to the intersection of the Florida Turnpike and U.S. 27, and designate it as Urban Expansion, to allow for a commercial center to be built there. He stated that water and sewer services is available to the site from the City of Leesburg, who is supporting the request, noting that it is within their Joint Planning Agreement. He stated that they have asked that the applicants have architectural standards and design criteria available, when they come back to the Board for approval of their rezoning request, not unlike what has been adopted at the Turnpike exchange further up the road at CR 470, so the applicants will be developing those as part of the second part of the process, the rezoning use, which will be coming back before the Board at the time of adoption, in 90 to 120 days.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no one present who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
Commr. Stivender complimented Mr. Richey for working with Mr. Greg Mihalic, Economic Development and Tourism Director, in trying to do something a little more diversified than residential and bring into the County some commercial and economic base.
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hanson and carried unanimously,
by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved to transmit to the Department of Community Affairs a request for approval of an Amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for 2001-27, LLC and George Corbett/Green Consulting Group, Inc./Steven J. Richey, P.A.,Land Plan Amendment No. 03/8/3-3,Tracking No. 75-03-LPA.
LAND PLAN AMENDMENT NO. 04/5/5-3 - CHANGE FUTURE LAND USE
MAP FROM SUBURBAN TO URBAN EXPANSION - BANYAN CONSTRUCTION
& DEVELOPMENT/EDWARD VRABLIK/GREEN CONSULTING GROUP,
INC./STEVEN J. RICHEY, P.A./ - TRACKING NO. 5-04-LPA
Mr. John Kruse, Senior Planner, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, presented this request, stating that the applicant is requesting an amendment to the Future Land Use Map for a 355 acre parcel of property, located north of U.S. 27 and the Florida Turnpike, from Suburban to Urban Expansion. He stated that staff has reviewed the appropriateness of the site, noting that it is currently located in Suburban, which does not meet timeliness, based on the analysis that was conducted by staff; however, if the future land use designation is changed from Suburban to Urban Expansion, the timeliness analysis would not apply. He stated that the Staff Report addresses several other issues and noted that there are also some factors that indicate sprawl in the area. He stated that the Urban Area Residential Point System was brought up, however, noted that it pertains to Urban Expansion and Urban, not Suburban. He stated that the Board’s backup material contained population projections regarding impacts to the school system, however, based on staff’s review of the Comprehensive Plan and indicators of sprawl, staff was recommending denial of the request. He stated that the Local Planning Agency voted to deny the request, as well, by a 7-1 vote.
Commr. Hanson stated that the County was going to look at holding a workshop on doing something else with Suburban, at which time Mr. Kruse stated that the matter has been discussed quite a bit with the Environmental Protection Advisory Board, as well as with some other Boards, and the Comprehensive Planning Section is looking at it at the present time, but he did not foresee it being addressed until the Comprehensive Plan rewrite is done, which is scheduled to be completed by the end of 2005. She stated that the Board has talked about allowing one unit to the acre and requiring clustering today, as opposed to waiting, because they might meet timeliness at some point in the future.
Mr. Kruse stated that, until that is adopted, he is bound by what is currently written in the Comprehensive Plan.
Mr. Jeff Richardson, Planning Manager, Planning and Development Services, Growth Management, addressed the Board stating that a joint meeting has been scheduled with the Board and the Local Planning Agency for September 13, 2004, and clustering might be one of the issues on the Agenda for that meeting.
Commr. Hanson requested that, if it is not already on the Agenda, it be added to it.
Mr. Greg Mihalic, Economic Development and Tourism Director, addressed the Board and presented them with a memorandum from Mr. Carl Lunderstadt, Sr., Chairman of the Industrial Development Authority, indicating that the Authority voted in support of the proposed project, but, more importantly, in support of the concept that when there is a large employment center adjacent to a housing development there needs to be a diversity of housing available for the workforce that will work in that area. He stated that, as it mentions in the memorandum, the houses that are going to be developed within the proposed development will meet the affordable housing criteria for workforce housing that is set up by the State, in fact, noted that there is almost $100 million in first time home buyer mortgage bonds available for developments such as the proposed development, where the families can make up to $63,000 per year and have low interest loans available to them - not from the money that the County has set aside, but directly from money that the State has set aside in the mortgage bonds. He stated that there are over a half dozen lenders in the County that are willing to make the loans available. He noted that the memorandum is not addressing a site specific location, it just happens that the proposed site is adjacent to the Christopher C. Ford Commerce Park.
Commr. Hanson stated that she feels it is going to be harder and harder to truly have affordable housing in Lake County, although the need is there. She stated that she felt the proposed site would be an excellent place for a professional park and felt that the IDA would support that concept, as well.
Mr. Steve Richey, Attorney, representing the applicant, addressed the Board stating that the memorandum the Board received from the Industrial Development Authority specifically speaks in terms of the rezoning request before the Board this date and supports it for the reasons set forth in the memorandum. He stated that it is site specific to the request before them and wanted to point that out, noting that it is a little different than what Commr. Hanson had just stated. He stated that it is not generic, noting that this particular piece of property for this particular use is what the IDA Chairman wrote the Board about, citing some of the Comprehensive Plan issues that support this view. He stated that the property consists of 455 acres, of which 355 acres is before the Board this date as a Comprehensive Plan Amendment from Suburban to Urban Expansion and the other 100 acres is Urban, which allows seven (7) units to the acre. He stated that the Comprehensive Plan Map jumps from Urban to Suburban, whereas, normally, in the planning principles that were adopted in the Comprehensive Plan, it would jump from Urban to Urban Expansion to Suburban or Rural. He stated that, for some reason, between the Florida Turnpike and U.S. 27 the map jumps to Suburban from Urban, which is part of the big red circle that is located at U.S. 27, S.R. 19, and the Turnpike, where there is a major employment center and the Urban is part of that process. He stated that it is strange to talk in terms of Urban sprawl, when one is contiguous to Urban and to the employment site and across the street from the County’s industrial park.
Mr. Richey gave the Board a quick overview of how the proposed project came about, noting that several years ago there was discussion about the need to create affordable housing in the area of the industrial park. He stated that the Development of Regional Impact (DRI) that created the County’s industrial park contains a provision that states that the Board will promote and encourage affordable housing in that area. He stated that he represents Mr. Frank Gammon, Banyan Homes, who understands the need for affordable housing in that area, because he is a member of the IDA, and, more importantly, he is in the business of providing affordable housing, pursuant to the rules of the County’s Land Development Regulations and its Comprehensive Plan. He stated that the request before the Board this date is only for approval to transmit the request to the Department of Community Affairs, noting that when the applicant’s request for rezoning comes back before the Board, he will provide the Board with a PUD that will meet the criteria for affordable housing. He stated that the applicant cannot get the density and intensity that he is asking for, without meeting that criteria.
It was noted that the request will be specific to the percentage of affordable housing.
Mr. Richey stated that there will be clustering in the project, noting that intermittent throughout the site is land that is going to have to be preserved as open space. He stated that the applicant is going to provide affordable housing, do a PUD with open space, take the Urban density that is already in place and spread it out on the site, and, at the end of the process, the applicant will be reducing the density, by combining the two. He pointed out the fact that Planning and Development Services was told that water and sewer was not available to the site, however, noted that the Board had a letter in their backup material from the City of Groveland indicating that they would be willing to service the project with water and sewer. He stated that the applicant will pay whatever impact fees and gap fees there will be, when the request for rezoning comes back before the Board for approval. He stated that he met with staff a year ago regarding this parcel of property and Mr. Gammon entered into a contract to purchase it, with no contingencies on where it is today, which is why he was asking the Board to proceed with the request. He stated that he feels comfortable that DCA is going to look upon the project favorably, based on their reading of the Comprehensive Plan, noting that he feels the applicant’s proposal is consistent with the Comprehensive Plan and is appropriately being evaluated by the Urban Expansion criteria.
Mr. Tim Green, Green Consulting Group, Inc., addressed the Board, as requested by Mr. Richey, and answered questions pertaining to this request, with regard to the County’s Comprehensive Plan and the fact that he has been involved with said Plan; has a working knowledge of said Plan; and has testified under oath, as an expert, regarding said Plan. He stated that he and county staff disagree on whether or not the Urban point system should be appropriate for reviewing the Comprehensive Plan Amendment process, at which time he discussed the points rating system and how it relates to this project, noting that Policy 1-1.7 - Urban Area Residential Density Chart, contained in the text of the Future Land Use Element Data Inventory and Analysis, shall be used as a guide, in part, to determine the residential densities in the following situations, being:
(1) During the review of the rezoning petition initiated by a property owner, or their agent.
(2) During the review of a DRI (Development of Regional Impact), pursuant to Chapter 380.
(3) During specific area plans.
(4) Other appropriate review stages, i.e., land use plan and map amendments, subdivision applications, or site plan reviews.
Mr. Green stated that staff’s point of view is that one cannot use the higher authority to review something that cannot meet the lower authority, noting that, if the proposed project cannot meet timeliness, it cannot be reviewed under the other system. He stated that he feels the policy states one can do that, when doing a land use plan map amendment, so he analyzed the project, based on that chart and the points system, and feels that the proposed project scored quite well. He stated that another issue is that timeliness for the proposed project goes out two miles and the project scores points for being three-quarters of a mile from an employment center. He discussed the issues of vehicular access, fire protection, water supply, sewer services, water reuse, and affordable housing (which the applicant has committed to, in writing). He discussed the use of land that has not previously been altered, for which the project receives points on, noting that it has been non-native, or pasture land, since 1981. He stated that they also received points for submitting the project as a PUD, at which time he noted that, if they used the points the project has received, they would be allowed to construct up to six units per acre. He stated that, even though the Urban designation located next to the project allows up to seven units per acre, the project would be limited to six. He noted that there will be a reduction in density, when the blended project is brought forward.
Mr. Richey interjected that, in the letter to the Board, the applicant has indicated that the density will be between 1.3 and 1.4 units per acre on the overall site.
Mr. Green displayed and reviewed an aerial (Applicant’s Exhibit A) of the site showing the proposed, as well as surrounding, land use designations, noting that it will be a clustered development, with lots of pockets of neighborhoods within the development.
Mr. Richey reiterated the fact that the project meets the points system, it will be on central water and sewer, it will be clustered, the density will be 1.3 units per acre, the applicant is going to pay the impact fees for schools, and it will have affordable housing.
Mr. Green pointed out the fact that he went through the Staff Report, point by point, and rebutted many of the things that were stated. He noted that the affordable housing figure is set at $148,900.00, at which time some members of the Board stated that they did not consider that to be affordable housing.
Commr. Hanson suggested, rather than doing the land use amendment, changing the language under Suburban that would allow one unit per acre, but would still allow transition, which she feels is appropriate for that area.
Mr. Egor Emery, representing the Lake County Conservation Council, addressed the Board stating that the proposed development has some interesting points. He stated that the Council is interested in changing the County’s Comprehensive Plan and this particular situation just points out one of the problems they have with Suburban, which he noted they hate. He stated that they would like to see a larger regional plan in place, rather than changing the Comprehensive Plan parcel by parcel. He stated that this request deals with an Urban area, it is not in the City, at which time he again asked the Board not to get into the Urban business.
Commr. Cadwell stated that he has been very concerned about this case, because he has preached and preached that the County needs to have affordable housing in the area of the industrial park, to make it a viable industrial park and the area conducive to better jobs. He stated that those two factors have put him in a quandary, with regard to the land use amendment, but, he feels the request outweighs his concern about development moving out towards the industrial park. He stated that the County built the industrial park and anticipates that a lot of things will be going on in that area, with regard to the creation of jobs. He stated that, over the years, in meeting with the companies and talking to them, part of what they are looking at is having a workforce and having housing available for that workforce, understanding that all the jobs are not going to be $200,000.00 per year jobs. He stated that he would support transmitting the request to DCA, however, warned that, when the request comes back before the Board for approval of the rezoning and a good percentage of the property is not proposed for affordable housing, he would stop supporting it at that point.
The Chairman opened the public hearing.
No one was present in opposition to the request.
There being no further individuals who wished to address the Board, the Chairman closed the public hearing.
A motion was made by Commr. Cadwell and seconded by Commr. Hill to overturn the recommendation of the Local Planning Agency and transmit to the Department of Community Affairs (DCA) a request for an Amendment to the Future Land Use Map (FLUM) for Banyan Construction & Development/Edward R. Vrablik/Green Consulting Group, Inc./Steven J. Richey, P.A., Land Plan Amendment No. 04/5/5-3,Tracking No. 5-04-LPA.
Under discussion, Commr. Hanson stated that her concern about the project is that, although it is for affordable housing, she does not see a lot of the people that will be working in the area being able to afford the housing.
Commr. Cadwell stated that the County has pretty much sold all of the property in the industrial park, however, noted that there will be a lot more activity going on in that area in the near future.
Mr. Greg Mihalic, Economic Development and Tourism Director, interjected that this request deals with moderate income affordable housing, noting that it is for those families where the husband is making approximately $35,000 per year and the wife is making approximately $18,000, or approximately $50,000 to $55,000 per year between the two, so they can afford three times that for a house.
The Chairman called for a vote on the motion, which was carried, by a 4-1 vote.
Commr. Hanson voted “No”.
OTHER BUSINESS
REAPPOINTMENT TO CONSERVATION COUNCIL
On a motion by Commr. Hill, seconded by Commr. Pool and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board reappointed Mr. Robert Miller as the Conservation Council’s representative on the Impact Fee Committee, for a two-year term, ending August 6, 2004.
APPOINTMENT TO COMPREHENSIVE HEALTH CARE COMMITTEE
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Cadwell and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board appointed Dr. Margaret Wacker as the Lake-Sumter Community College School of Nursing’s representative on the Comprehensive Health Care Committee.
REPORTS - COUNTY ATTORNEY
SCHEDULING OF CLOSED SESSION
On a motion by Commr. Hanson, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved a request from the County Attorney to hold a Closed Session on September 7, 2004, at 10:00 a.m.
REPORTS - COUNTY MANAGER
UPDATE ON HURRICANE CHARLEY
Ms. Cindy Hall, Assistant County Manager, gave the Board a brief update regarding Hurricane Charley, noting that the County’s Outreach Team is doing a very good job. She stated that they focused very diligently on Hurricane Charley and getting information out to the general public in press releases, such as information regarding a Citizens’ Hotline, websites for the County and weather, the closing of government offices, shelters, the garbage collection schedule, safety precautions, sandbag locations, wind and rain forecasts, building permit information, water quality information, the FEMA Hotline, price gauging warnings, and contractor license information. She stated that the County’s website had approximately 104,000 hits during that time period, at which time she noted that they included information that was constantly updated on the activation level of the EOC (Emergency Operation Center) and had all their press releases out on the website, as well as hourly maps that were tracking the location of the storm, shelter information and maps, and animal friendly hotels, which she noted was a constant question they received.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HILL - DISTRICT 1
REMINDER ABOUT FOOTBALL SEASON
Commr. Hill reminded everyone that football season starts this weekend and encouraged everyone to attend the games and have a good time.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER POOL - DISTRICT 2
KLINGER AIRPORT
Commr. Pool informed the Board that he had received a call from Mr. and Mrs. Klinger, the former owners of Klinger Airport, off of C.R. 33, in Groveland, stating that they have lived at their current address for over 30 years, but were told that their address would be changing and are seeking help from the Board to keep it. He stated that the couple is elderly and does not want to have to deal with Social Security changes, driver’s license changes, etc., and he did not understand why the Board could not do something to help them keep the address they have had for the past 30 years, noting that it does not make sense to change it after that length of time.
It was noted that the County Manager, Mr. Bill Neron, would check into the matter, to see what can be done about it.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT 3
RESOLUTION SUPPORTING EQUAL OPPORTUNITY ACT AND NO ROOM
FOR POVERTY RALLY
On a motion by Commr. Cadwell, seconded by Commr. Hill and carried unanimously, by a 5-0 vote, the Board approved Resolution No. 2004-128, supporting the Equal Opportunity Act and the No Room for Poverty Rally.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT 3
PUBLIC ASSISTANCE GRANTS
Commr. Stivender informed the Board that the County needs a representative to sign a signature authority for the Public Assistance Grants on Thursday, August 26, 2004, in the Board Chambers, and she was going to designate herself, as Chairman of the Board of County Commissioners, to sign said paperwork.
It was the consensus of the Board that Commr. Stivender do so.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON - DISTRICT 4
CONSERVATION SUBDIVISION DESIGN WORKSHOP
Commr. Hanson informed the Board that Mr. Randall Arendt, the pioneer of open space design, held a Conservation Subdivision Design Workshop in Lake County last Friday, August 20, 2004, which was pretty well attended by representatives from the cities, as well as the School Board. She stated that there was some interest in having another workshop after the first of the year, but one that is more tailored towards the cities, therefore, felt that staff should be directed to move forward and see what can be put together regarding it.
Commr. Stivender stated that she felt it would be helpful for all the elected officials, including those from the municipalities, to attend the next workshop and suggested that staff invite them to attend.
Commr. Hanson thanked Mr. Greg Welstead, Deputy County Manager/Growth Management Director, for helping put the workshop together.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER HANSON - DISTRICT 4
UPDATE ON PEAR GATEWAY PROJECT
Commr. Hanson stated that she felt the Board needed to have an update on the P.E.A.R. (Palatlakaha Environmental Agricultural Reserve) Gateway Project.
It was noted that the County was moving forward with said project and that the Board was scheduled to receive an update on it on September 7, 2004.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER CADWELL - DISTRICT 5
URBAN FORESTRY
Commr. Cadwell stated that he had seen a memorandum where Commr. Hanson had asked for some information on urban forestry, noting that the City of Umatilla went through that process with The Arbor Foundation, due to the fact that Umatilla is a participant in the “Tree City U.S.A.” program. He stated that he felt they also had a program for those counties that have more rural areas that are not quite as stringent, to make sure that they have a program to keep their trees, and asked that staff check into the matter.
Commr. Hanson stated that something she is concerned about, since Hurricane Charley came through the County, is that a lot of the trees that the County is requiring to be planted are water oaks, or laurel oaks, which are great short-term, but not long-term, because they have a much shorter life span and are much more vulnerable to the storms. She suggested that they not be planted.
REPORTS - COMMISSIONER STIVENDER - CHAIRMAN AND DISTRICT 3
(CONT’D.)
ELECTION DAY REMINDER
Commr. Stivender reminded everyone that Tuesday, August 31, 2004, is Election Day and encouraged everyone to get out and vote.
ADJOURNMENT
There being no further business to be brought to the attention of the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 1:45 p.m.
_________________________________
DEBBIE STIVENDER, CHAIRMAN
ATTEST:
________________________________
JAMES C. WATKINS, CLERK